As this week’s Torah portion opens, a prominent Israelite named Korach ben Yizhar, together with two hundred and fifty chieftains, publicly revolts against the leadership of Moses and Aaron. Korach’s grievance is articulated as a populist call to arms:
They combined against Moses and Aaron and said to them, “You have gone too far! For all the community are holy, all of them, and the LORD is in their midst. Why then do you raise yourself about the LORD’s congregation?” (Numbers 16:3)
The rebellion ends ignobly: at the climax of this episode, the earth opens up to swallow Korach, his followers, their families and all of their possessions.
Korach’s is not the first rebellion experienced by the Israelite community, but in some ways it is the most complex and disturbing. For one thing, we cannot help but be struck by the fact that Korach’s grievance seems to be quite valid: he voices a kind of proto-democratic sentiment that speaks to the intrinsic value of every Israelite citizen (contrasted with the more “hierarchical and “elitist” leadership embodied by Moses and Aaron). Many commentators have pointed out, however, that Korach’s populism might not be all it’s cracked up to be. While he speaks the language of the masses, the traditional take on Korach is that his “democratic commitment” is somewhat less than pure.
Though this story was written centuries before the political concept of liberal democracy was ever dreamed of, Korach’s rebellion has a special resonance for the 21st century world. Indeed, what do we mean when we speak of our commitment to the “global spread of democracy?” What do we make of world leaders, like Korach, who speak the language of the masses, but clearly harbor their own anti-democratic agendas? How do we feel when, in our own country, our leaders talk passionately about spreading our democratic values abroad yet show little regard for the Constitution here at home?
Fareed Zakaria, in his important book “The Future of Freedom” articulates the current challenge well:
Modern democracies will face difficult new challenges – fighting terrorism, adjusting to globalization, adapting to an aging society – and they will have to make their system work much better than it currently does. That means making democratic decision-making effective, reintegrating constitutional liberalism into the practice of democracy, rebuilding broken political institutions and civic associations. Perhaps most difficult of all, it will require that those with immense power in our societies embrace their responsibilities, lead, and set standards that are not only legal, but moral. Without this inner stuffing, democracy will become an empty shell, not simply inadequate but potentially dangerous, bringing with it it the erosion of liberty, the manipulation of freedom, and the decay of common life.
…As we enter the twenty-first century, our task is to make democracy safe for the world.
(“The Future of Freedom,” p. 256)
One of the aspects of democracy that is often forgotten is the responsibility of each individual to participate, to learn what is happening, and to bring leaders to account. It isn’t enough just to depose leaders and change for new ones. If democracy is to thrive, we the people must be more active.